სჯანი

ინტერდისციპლინური და ინტერინსტიტუციონალური მიდგომები – ქართული ლიტერატურათმცოდნეობითი და ქართველოლოგიური კვლევების ეფექტურობის გარანტი

ირმა რატიანი — 2023-05-29

Georgian studies are evidence of the originality of Georgian national science and, therefore, one of the most important identifiers of Georgian identity. The development of scientific research clearly reflects the dynamics of the process. The history of Georgian literary studies, as well as the history of Georgian studies in other humanitarian areas, invariably confirms it’s goal to serve the interests of the country: on the one hand, to be a measure and indicator of Georgian identity, and on the other hand, to demonstrate the involvement of Georgian culture and national studies in world cultural processes and scholarly dialogue.

The history of literary studies, like the history of humanitarian researches in general, vividly reflects different epochs, standards, compromises and contradictions. Academic research never stands stagnant, but develops in accordance with the development
of the context and time. I’m more that sure, that the standard of modern literary studies is undoubtedly defined by interdisciplinary and inter-institutional researches. The best confirmation of this historical flexibility of literary studies is the first half of the 20th century, when the changes in the field led to an excessive variety, abundance and diversity of literary-theoretical schools. A multi-interpretive space was created, the methodological foundation of which was interdisciplinary studies for the simple reason that each theoretical school had an interdisciplinary character. The necessary conditions and space for multicultural and comparative studies were created; however, the academic circles of the Soviet countries had a limited access to this process. Soviet science and, of course, first of all, literary studies as one of the leading branches of humanitarian thought, were enclosed in a rigid ideological framework by the Soviet regime. Although individual scholars and critics were able to express the innovative opinion, it was not enough to develop interdisciplinary and multicultural studies widely. Today, when the post-Soviet Georgian literary studies has overcome the most difficult stages, and assimilated to the maximum with Western the literary studies, the time has come to develop interdisciplinary and inter-institutional researches. “Pure literary studies”, in an unmixed way, – it is a Yesterday. Today it’s crucial to improve interdisciplinary and inter-sectorial communications and collaboration, which, in itself, implies inter-institutional collaboration. The Institute of Georgian Literature is starting to move to this new platform and calls on other Georgian scholars to join this initiative.

ახალი წიგნები

გაგა ლომიძე — 2023-05-29

რეცენზია კრებულზე – "ლიტერატურული ჟანრები"

ლევან გელაშვილი — 2023-05-29

The scientific letter presents a review of the book Literary Genres (volume one), which was prepared on the basis of the Department of Literary Theory and Comparative Studies of the Shota Rustaveli Institute of Georgian Literature and the Educational-Scientific Institute of Theoretical and Comparative Literary Studies of TSU and which covers works dedicated literary genres. Articles of all the authors are studied and discussed in detail in the letter.

The presented review book consists of two parts: the first part includes «epos and epic genres» and the second part covers «drama and dramatic genres». The book also includes a guide to classic literature; Don Quixote, the first modern novel - and one of the best! 2018 publication (author: Ana Puchao de Lesia Vicente Perez de Leon) translated from English by Irma Ratiani.

The evolution and changing characteristics of genres in culture, their restudying and rethinking of this entire heritage, its content and meaning analysis, are facing new challenges. This is the first collection that brings together works on the epos and great epic genres.

პერსონაჟთა ქცევის ფსიქოლოგიური მოტივაციები ვაჟა-ფშაველას პოემაში "სტუმარ–მასპინძელი": ზვიადაური

მანანა კვაჭანტირაძე — 2023-05-29

Personality of Zviadauri is the main factor and the cause of tradegy in the poem “Guest and host’’ by Vazha Pshavela.

Author applies contrast paineting style: Zvizadauri is mainly silent while Jokhola is talking. Vazha Pshavela grants his character with freedom of word and action while Zviadauri is mostly shown in position of self defence lacking chance of any action. As he is in charge of his own movements, he never hides his name by onomastic act – by naming himself (“I am Zviadauri’’ – he was shouting down the hills’’) while Jokhola is forced to stay anonymous.

Unlike Zviadauri Jokhola is known by his active actions and opinions, he is intense in terms of inner force and ability of enmity. Image of Zviadauri is given by distanced viewpoint that highlites attractiveness and fatal impact of the hero on people around. However, only strangers and external circumstance make possible to discover his unusual vital energy. Entire dramatic collision, dialogues and psychological pictures are linked to his vibrant energy.

Meeting with Zviadauri awakes inner grace, generosity and divine nature in personalities of Jokhola and Aghaza.

Death of Zviadauri naturally, without any cultural or religious intervention awakes in Quist crowd deep impulse of human unity – a soul of compassion and tolerance that creates natural basement where complex building of socio-cultural relations is constructed. It is secured by enemy tenet and deeply buried in order to safeguard identity of the community. Undefeated soul of man (Zviadauri) as a value was the common basis that gave birth and instantly `fixed’’ “personal’’ impulse of human unity and compassion.

Zviadauri dies not only for Khevsurs but for the whole world. Therefore Zviadauri is grieved not only by Aghaza but by nature as its own part and besides it is `ordered by the Lord’’. This episode indicates that death of Zviadauri is important more for nature than for culture, being more precise – to the part of the culture that is embodied in nature.

By the character of Zviaauri Vazha Pshavela depicts image related to The child of God, he creates memorial space in reader’s imagination.

Rhetoric of Zviadauri’s death – `The column coming from the sky’’– transforms human image into mythical element. This collective appraisal demonstrates the scale of happening called Zviadauri: he is the protector of Khevsureti (`Sward and shield of Pshav-Khevsureti’’, `protector’’ etc.) He is ideal hero, the rare shine of nature, emanation of something unbelievable, a human power shared with nature.

The phrase` Coming down from sky’’ for Vazha Pshavela is content/function related aspect (Zviadauri’s association with Child of God) not only as poetic figure (hyperbole, exaggeration) but to his description `protector’’ that means patron and is
known as Andrez definition of Child of God in Khevsurian Andrez.

The core characteristic of Zviadauri is firmness and toughness is indicated by Andrez meaning of `solid’’ and represents mythical component of the image. As Z. Kinknadze mentions `The sacral meaning of this word is impenetrable in terms of physical body and morality as well. It is symbolized in word `solid’’ castles that are impossible to enter as they don’t have inner space. Physical solidity is the metaphor of moral restriction.’’

Zviadauri looks like supernatural, undefeatable force. Such mental and visual image of the enemy shows that Quists are not capable to fight Zviadauri as equal. They admit their weakness with words and actions. From here comes the idea that every form of fight is acceptable in order to defeat Zviaauri. As if Quists are not just killing the enemy but are getting rid of some unhuman, dangerous and cruel force.

Moral hierarchy of actions of main characters’ is accordingly manifested in spatial dimensions and its material constituents. Morally valuable actions take place in the open air. Place of dramatic dialogue between Aghaza and Jokhola is semi open space as the result of discussion is not clear yet. House is a topos of men’s justice, nature is the space of divine participation and dwelling of ` big’’ time.

In both cases – for friends and enemies, for Quists as well as for Khevsurs Zviadauri is perceived in high, vertical dimension (`He is a column’’). This is his natural spatial situation that he holds in hands like a flag in cases of friendship and enmity and by which he strengthens his name (face).

In the moment of meeting with Jokhola he is inside the mountain and not on it. He is in labyrinth; it is more accident than regularity. Zviadauri lost his way, he leaved his own life order and stepped into chaos. Now he has to give regular form to everything that will happen afterwards. He should find his way out from chaos and return to order (persist as `column of light’’). In Quists cemetery Zvidauri is performing mission of superhuman, he manages to make death his choice and persist as free man.

For Vazha Pshavela bravery is not homogenous concept, nor strict or positive psychosomatic condition. Unlike mythical layer realistic view of Zviadauri is courageous, firm, fearless and the same time fierceful and brutal men of few words.

The character of Zviadauri manifests singular synthesis of honor and bravery that is painted in correlation with the idea of freedom. Zviadauri is free only within the frame of enmity. Enmity marks boarders of freedom and bravery as if fight was the only measure and foundation for his firmness.

By the images of Quist guests author depicts picture of people with awoken personality that eventually is restricted by society and never transformed into tradition. However, this biggest moral value gained by person is converted into myth and prolonged in eternity.

Despite of being happy dinner of three is sad and transient. Only the mist is long living. The final mythic scene of the poem depicts dialectics of relationship between part and whole and gives symbolic picture of eternal battle. Socio-ethical opposition e is opened in the scale of world and nature pointing to relation between human soul and mystical world.

Vazha tributes momentary light of individual, however it is a light that gives charm to human existence and the world itself. That’s why he depicts dinner scene in vertical dimension, on the top of mountain, lightened up by fire flames. A passage of friends, the emanation of human souls looks brief on the background of constant war and enmity in sinful human history. Even so it is repeated every night because humans never get tired of explosions of love, kindness compassion. Mankind is always eager to see it over and over again.

(შავი?) ზღვის სახე ვალერიან გაფრინდაშვილის პოეზიაში

იორდან ლუცკანოვი — 2023-05-29

სტატიაში გაანალიზებულია ვალერიან გაფრინდაშვილის ლექსები, რომლებშიც გადმოცემულია საზღვაო მოტივები. ანალიზი ორი მიმართულებით მიმდინარეობს: თეორიული და კულტურულ-ისტორიული.

თეორიული პერსპექტივა შთაგონებულია ანა-ტერეზა ტიმიენიეკის ფენომენოლოგიური კვლევით, მგრძნობელობის შესახებ; ბუნების ელემენტების, კერძოდ, ზღვის მგრძნობელობის ასახვა მხატვრულ ლიტერატურაში და მისი შემდგომი დიფერენცირება „სპექტაკლს“, „სიმფონიას“ და „ბუნების დრამას“ შორის (ან, უფრო დეტალურად, „დედამიწის პეიზაჟის“ ამა თუ იმ ძირითად ელემენტებს შორის, როგორიცაა ზღვა ან მთა). „სპექტაკლი“ ლირიკული გმირის ინტერესის ობიექტია; „სიმფონია“ ჩნდება მაშინ, როდესაც აღნიშნული აგენტი ხდება „სპექტაკლის“ „ინსტრუმენტი“, რომელიც აღარ არის სპექტაკლი; ბუნებრივი ელემენტისა და ლირიკული გმირის ურთიერთქმედებით კი ჩნდება „დრამა“.

კულტურულ-ისტორიული კვლევა წარმართულია ინტუიციური ვარაუდით, რომ ქართულმა კულტურულმა ელიტამ მე-20 საუკუნის დასაწყისში შეიმუშავა (ან აპირებდა შეემუშვებინა) კულტურულ-ფუძემდებლური მითი, რომელიც ორიენტირებულია კულტურათაშორის შეხვედრებზე არა მთების, არამედ – ზღვის გადაღმა. ეს ერთგვარი გამოწვევა იყო იმ ფონზე, რაც ქართულ ლიტერატურაში უკვე დამკვიდრებული იყო; ყველაზე ცნობილია ილია ჭავჭავაძის „მგზავრის წერილებით“. ამ სიახლეს შეიძლება ვუწოდოთ „ნეოარგონავტიკის“ მითი.

იმის ნაცვლად, რომ რუსეთში მიღებული ევროპული განათლების გადამუშავებით კულტურული „ქართველობის“ მარცვალი დაინახოს და ქართველ მთიელთა ადამინური ბუნება გადააფასოს, ეს ჰიპოთეტური ახალი მითი მას ხედავს „მედეას“ უნარში, თავიდან მოიშოროს „იასონი“ ან კიდევ უკეთესი, გადააქციოს იგი „ორფეოსად“ მასთან შეხვედრის შემდეგ (და მანამდეც კი).

ზემოთხსენებული მოსაზრებების უმნიშვნელოვანესი გადაკვეთის წერტილია საკითხი იმაზე, მიუძღვით თუ არა წვლილი და თუ ასეა, რა დოზით ან რა სახით, საზღვაო სახეებს მითის ილოკუტიური (რაიმე მიზნით შესრულებული სამეტყველო აქტი) და პერლოკუტიური (სამეტყველო აქტი, როდესაც მსმენელმა გაიგო მთქმელის განზრახვა და სწორი რეაგირება მოახდინა მასზე) ძალის და ზოგადად, მითის არსებობაში. მკვლევარი ვარაუდობს, რომ რადგან, პირველ რიგში, `(ნეო)არგონავტიკისმითი უნდა შეიცავდეს საზღვაო სახეებს, და მეორეც, რომ მითმა უნდა მოაჯადოვოს, შესაძლოა, მისი ეს უმთავრესი ფუნქცია დალექილიყო მითის შემადგენელ ცალკეულ გამონათქვამებში. მკვლევარი თვლის, რომ ტიმენეცკის მიხედვით, გაფრინდაშვილის ლექსები, რომლებშიც გაშლილია ზღვის „დრამა“, პოტენციურად, „ნეოარგონავტიკის“ მითის წარმოქმნაში შეტანილი ყველაზე ღირებული წვლილია.

იხრება რა, ცალკეული ლექსების, როგორც ავტორის შემოქმედების მეტატექსტის შემადგენელი ნაწილების განხილვისკენ, მკვლევარი
გარკვეული დოზით იყენებს ორი თეორიის ინსტრუმენტებს: 1. ლირიკული ციკლი, როგორც დასტური პოეტური ტექსტის მიდრეკილებისა, ჩართული იყოს უფრო მსხვილ შემოქმედებით ერთეულში (ლეონ აკოფიანი) და 2. ავტოტექსტუალობა, როგორც ინტერტექსტუალობის შიდა შემოქმედებითი ვარიანტი და (თვით)გამეორების დიალექტიკა (რადოსვეტ კოლაროვი).

პირველი თეორიიდან აღებულია, უპირველეს ყოვლისა, წარმოდგენა ზედნაშენის ურთიერთკავშირის სხვადასხვა ხარისხის შესახებ (ლირიკული ციკლის, ნაწარმოების) და, შესაბამისად, „ცენტრისა“ და „პერიფერიის“ ორგანიზებულობა ზედნაშენის შიგნით. მეორე თეორიიდან აღებულია ყოყმანის, როგორც გადადების სპეციფიკურ გაგება და, ასევე, „სამუშაოს გამაძლიერებლისა“ და „სამუშაოს ამხსნელის“ გაგება.

აღიარებს რა სათაურის მნიშვნელობას, მკითხველის სწავლების პროცესში, სტატიის ავტორი გაფრინდაშვილის ლექსებს, რომლებშიც
გვხვდება ზღვის სახეები და მოტივები, ორ ძირითად ჯგუფად ჰყოფს: სემანტიკური პოზიცია (2) და – სხვა დანარჩენი ლექსები. სხვა დროს თუ ყურადღებას ამახვილებს პირველ ჯგუფზე, ამჯერად მკვლევარი მეორე ჯგუფზე ჩერდება. მათში ის აღიარებს ორი ლექსის განსაკუთრებულ მნიშვნელობას, რომლებიც, ჯერ ერთი, თხრობისა და სახეობრივი აზროვნების დონეზე, ყველაზე ნათლად გადმოსცემენ „(ნეო) არგონავტიკის“ მითს და შესაბამისად, უარყოფენ კიდეც მას. მეორეს მხრივ კი, ავტორის მიზანია შეკრიბოს საზღვაო მოტივები და სახეები, რომლებიც მეტნაკლებად განცალკევებულად ვლინდება სხვა ლექსებში: „სიზმარი“ (1917), „ზღვა და ბელადი (1939), მეორე ლექსზე აქცენტის გაკეთება აუცილებელი გახდა კიდევ ერთი მიზეზით. ეს არის ლექსი ხოტბა და როგორც ჩანს, გაფრინდაშვილის ერთადერთი ლექსია, რომელშიც შეკრებილია „ზღვის“ სიმბოლოს ყველა ძირითადი სემანტიკური ასპექტი, რომლებიც გვხვდება მის შემოქმედებაში: ორმაგი უნივერსალური ელემენტის ასპექტი, რომლის მეორე ასპექტია მუსიკა, მიღმიერი სამყარო, ან, შესაძლოა, მხოლოდ სამყაროს „მეორე“ ნახევარი, ან, უბრალოდ, კავშირი სხვა სამყაროსთან თუ სხვა ნაწილთან, სხეულებრივობისა და უსხეულობის ზღვარზე. ამ ნაწარმოებიდან ამოღებულია არასხეულებრივობა, ემპირიული ზღვა, ადამიანური მასების მეტაფორა, მაგრამ ქალურობა, როგორც ხსენებული „სხვაობის“ ერთ-ერთი მთავარი მახასიათებელი, ამ ნაწარმოებიდან ამოშლილია.

ამ ორი ლექსისადმი მიძღვნილ ახლო კითხვის ორ ბლოკს შორის, მე-4 და მე-6 თავებში ავტორი გვთავაზობს საზღვაო მოტივების ზოგად მონახაზს გაფრინდაშვილის დანარჩენ ლექსებში (რაც არის მე-5 თავის მთავარი ამოცანა და სტატიის მთავარი აღწერილობითი ამოცანა); ადგენს ლექსების კატალოგს, შემდეგი კრიტერიუმების მიხედვით: პირველ რიგში, ეს არის „მეტასემანტიკური“ კრიტერიუმი, რომელიც განასხვავებს „ჟანრებს“ საზღვაო სტიქიებისადმი კუთვნილების მიხედვით. ასკვნის რა, რომ რომ ზოგიერთი ლექსი მერყეობს „სპექტაკლსა“ და „სიმფონიას“ შორის, ზოგი კი „სიმფონიასა“ და „დრამას“ შორის, სტატიის ავტორი შესაბამისად ჰყოფს ლექსებს. შემდეგ, ამ ორი ჯგუფიდან თითოეულში ახარისხებს ლექსებს საზღვაო სახეებისა და მოტივების მეტ-ნაკლებად განსაზღვრული სემანტიკის მიხედვით, რომლებიც გვხვდება ამა თუ იმ ლექსში. ზღვის ასოციაცია ქალურობასთან და სამყაროს „სხვა ნახევართან“,
ასევე, საზღვაო „განსხეულება“ აკუსტიკურ/მუსიკალურ „სხეულში“, როგორც ჩანს, ზღვის ყველაზე ხშირი სემანტიზაციაა გაფრინდაშვილის პოეზიაში. განსაკუთრებული ყურადღებას ექცევა პოეტიმეზღვაურისა და ნავის ადამიანური სულის (ერთი მხრივ) და არგონავტების მითთან დაკავშირებული მოტივების (მეორეს მხრივ) ანტიკური ტოპოსების თანაფარდობას. ამ ინტერესის ნიადაგზე მკვლევარი გვთავაზობს გაფრინდაშვილის ერთი და იმავე სათაურის („ძიება“) მქონე სამი ლექსის წინასწარ შედარებით ანალიზს. ზღვის მოტივების შემცველი ლექსების საერთო სქემა ემსახურება დამხმარე მიზანს, თვალი გაადევნოს და აჩვენოს თავსებადობა და თანაზომიერება ისეთ განსხვავებული ლექსებისა, როგორებიცაა „სიზმარი“ და „ზღვა და ბელადი“.

მოკლე დასკვნაში ავტორი აჯამებს „(ნეო)არგონავტიკული მითის“ გაფრინდაშვილისეულ ახსნას და მკითხველს სთავზობს, განიხილოს მისი პოეზიის ირიბი კავშირი ამ მითთან, როგორც მისი ქვეყნის ზიგზაგური პერსპექტივის სიმბოლო, პოლიტიკური `ლევიათანებისგან~ და `ბეჰემოთებისგან~ დამოუკიდებლად.

სტატიაში მოცემულია გაფრინდაშვილის პოეზიის ფრაგმენტების პწკარედული თარგმანი ოცდაათზე მეტი ლექსიდან.

როდესად ლიტერატურული სივრცე ემიჯნება ფიზიკურ გეოგრაფიას: აქსიონოვისა და მორჩილაძის მიერ შავი ზღვის დაკარგული კუნძულების ჩანაცვლება

ეუფ ოვზერენი — 2023-05-29

მაშინ, როდესაც მრავალრიცხოვანი კუნძულები ხმელთაშუა ზღვის გარშემო არსებული მიწების დამაკავშირებელ გზებად გამოიყენებოდა, კუნძულების არაარსებობა ისედაც მრისხანე, არასტუმართმოყვარე შავ ზღვაში სერიოზულ დაბრკოლებად იქცა. შავ ზღვაში ძალიან ცოტაა კუნძული და კიდევ უფრო ცოტა – დასახლებული.

თუმცა, ეს ჩვენთვის კიდევ უფრო აქტუალურს ხდის იმ მნიშვნელოვან როლს, რომელიც შეუძლიათ ითამაშონ ე.წ. „დაკარგულმა“
კუნძულებმა, თუნდაც, ლიტერატურულ, გამოგონილ და არა გეოგრაფიულ სივრცეში.

სტატიაში გაანალიზებულია ორი ნოვატორული რომანი, რომლებიც ერთგვარ გამოწვევას უგზავნიან შავი ზღვის გეოგრაფიის ისტორიულ მემკვიდრეობას; გამოგონილი კუნძულებით ავტორები მკითხველის წარმოსახვას მიმართვენ იმ სხვა გზებისკენ, რომლითაც შესაძლოა წასულიყო ისტორია. სხვა სიტყვებით, რომ ვთქვათ, ქმნინ იმას, რასაც ისტორიკოსები და სოციოლოგები „ალტერნატიულ ისტორიად“ ან „ისტორიულ ალტერნატივად“ ნათლავენ.

კონკრეტულად, სტატია ეხება ვასილი აქსიონოვის რომანს „კუნძული ყირიმი“ (1981, 1983) და აკი მორჩილაძის „სანტა ესპერანსას“ (2004, 2006). პირველი მკითხველს რთავს კონტრფაქტურ სავარჯიშოში, რომლის დროსაც ყირიმი იქცევა კუნძულად საბჭოთა რუსეთის სანაპიროზე, შთაგონებული კომუნისტური ჩინეთის მიერ, რომელიც შეშფოთებულია დამოუკიდებელი ტაივანით. მეორე რომანს კი უფრო დახვეწილი ფორმულირება აქვს: ყირიმის ომის შემდეგ სამი კუნძული ბრიტანული სამფლობელოებად იქცევა და გადარჩება როგორც თავშესაფარი მულტიკულტურული თანაარსებობისათვის, მიუხედავად მათი სიმყიფისა, რაც სწორედ შავ ზღვაში მდებარეობითაა განპირობებული, ეს კუნძულები იმაზე დიდ როლს თამაშობენ ისტორიის გადაკეთებაში, ვიდრე ნამდვილმა კუნძულებმა შეიძლება ითამაშონ.

თანამედროვე ვერლიბრის სტრუქტურულ-ნარატოლოგიური კვლევა: ბესიკ ხარანაულისა და ჩარლზ ბუკოვსკის ტექსტების კომპარატივისტული ანალიზი

გუბაზ ლეთოდიანი — 2023-05-29

ნაშრომი ეთმობა ვერლიბრის სტრუქტურულ-ნარატოლოგიურ კვლევას ჩარლზ ბუკოვსკისა (1920-1994 წწ.) და ბესიკ ხარანაულის (1939-...წ.) ლირიკულ ტექსტებში. ხსენებული ორი პოეტის შემოქმედების დიდი ნაწილი ჟანრობრივად ვერლიბრია.

საკვლევი თემის აქტუალურობას განაპირობებს შერჩეული ავტორების ტექსტების სტრუქტურულ-ნარატოლოგიური ანალიზი, – ამ კონკრეტული მეთოდების ჭრილში არ განხილულა ქართული ვერლიბრი.

კვლევის მიზანია თანამედროვე ლიტერატურათმცოდნეობითი მეთოდების დახმარებით ქართველი და ამერიკელი ავტორის ლირიკული ნიმუშების გააზრება, მათი ნარატოლოგიური და სტრუქტურული მახასიათებლების გამოყოფა, მათი სპეციფიკისა და მნიშვნელობის განსაზღვრა.

შედეგად, აქცენტირებულად განიხილება ორი პოეტური ნიმუში: „A სმილე ტო რემემბერ“ და „კარტოფილის ამოღება“.

მთავარი საკვლევი კითხვებია:
• რით ხასიათდება შერჩეული ორი ლექსის სტრუქტურა, სიუჟეტი?
• როგორ აღიქმება ავტორის, ნარატორის ინსტანცია?
• როგორია დროითი პრეზენტაცია განსახილველ ტექსტებში?
• ლექსების სტრუქტურულ-ნარატიული მოდელი კავშირშია პოსტმოდერნიზმთან თუ არა?

კვლევისათვის მნიშვნელოვანი იყო შემდეგი წყაროების გამოყენება: ჟერარ ჟენეტი – „ნარატიული დისკურსი“; „ნარატიული დისკურსი
– გადახედვა“; (განმარტავს ნარატოლოგიის ძირითად ცნებებს, მათ მიმართებებს. პირველი წიგნში შესაბამისი ტერმილოგიური აპარიტით – ხანგრძლივობა, სიხშირე, წესრიგი (დროითი პრეზენტაცია), ფოკალიზაცია და სხვა – განიხილულია პრუსტის შემოქმედება, მეორე წიგნი კი უფრო კრიტიკაზე პასუხია, დაზუსტებებით, მსჯელობითა და არგუმენტებით). მონიკა ფლუდერნიკი – "შესავალი ნარატოლოგიაში" ~ (მკვლევრისთვის საჭირო დამხმარე საშუალებაა, ვინაიდან განმარტავს ზემოთ (ჟენეტისეულ და არა მხოლოდ) ხსენებულ ცნებებსა და კატეგორიებს, რომელთაც გადამწყვეტი მნიშვნელობა ენიჭებათ წინამდებარე კვლევის მიზნის შესრულებაში); პოლ რიკიორი – „დრო და თხრობა: ტომი 3“ (ოთხი წიგნისგან შედგება, რომელშიც დროისა და ნარატივის გაგების შესახებ მსჯელობას
არისტოტელეს პოეტიკიდან იწყებს. იგი განარჩევს რეალურ და ფიქციურ დროს. საკვლევ საკითხზე ფოკუსირებისთვის განსაკუთრებით
მნიშვნელოვანია თავი 5: მხატვრული ლიტერატურა და მისი წარმოსახვითი ვარიაციები დროზე); ლინდა ჰაჩეონი "პოსტმოდერნიზმის პოეტიკა" ~ (ნაშრომი წარმოადგენს პოსტმოდერნიზმს როგორც კულტურულ მოვლენას, ეყრდნობა მრავალი ავტორის მოსაზრებებს (ბარტი, ფუკო, კალვინო, ბოდრიარი და სხვა) და აკუმულირებულად გადმოსცემს პოსტმოდერნული პოეტიკის ძირითად ასპექტებს); ავტორთა ჯგუფი – „თერია პოეზიაში ახალი მიდგომა ლირიკაში“ ერთგვარი მცდელობაა ლექსის ნარატოლოგიის მეთოდით კვლევა. რედაქტირებულია ევა მიულერზეტელმანისა და მარგარეტ რუბიკის მიერ (შეიცავს თანამედროვე ავტორების სხვადასხვა ნაშრომებს, როგორებიცაა მონიკა ფლუდერნიკი, ევა მიულერ-ზეტელმანი, ვერნერ ვოლფი, პიტერ ჰუნი და სხვ.)

დაკვირვების შედეგად გამოვლინდა, რომ რომ ორივე ლექსი წარმოადგენს ბავშვობის მოგონებას ჰომოდიეგეტური თხრობის საშუალებით. ორივეგან ნარატორი არის განმცდელი მეც. სიუჟეტი ბუკოვსკისთან უფრო ჩარჩოს პრინციპითაა აგებული, რაც ნაკლებად ვლინდება ხარანაულის ლექსში. სიუჟეტს ორივე ტექსტისთვის განმსაზღვრელი მნიშვნელობა აქვს, მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ ლირიკულ ჟანრი მას ნაკლებად ავლენს. ბუკოვსკის ტექსტში დრო ელიფსურია, თუმცა თანმიმდევრულად ვითარდება მოვლენები, დაახლოებით იგივე ხდება მეორე ლექსშიც, მაგრამ გრამატიკული დროის გადანაცვლება ფიქსირდება, თხრობა მაინც არალიენალურია.

ორივე პოემის დისკურსს განსაზღვრავს ამბის გარეშე გამოთქმული წინადადება. პირველ შემთხვევაში ესაა ბედნიერების შეუძლებლობა, მეორე შემთხვევაში კი ცხოვრების სირთულე. მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ კვლევაში აღნიშნულია (ბუკოვსის ლექსის ანალიზში) პარადოქსულობა, ის სულაც არაა პოსტმოდერნიზმთან კავშირში. საერთოდ, არცერთ ლექსში არ ვლინდება რაიმე მკვეთრი ნიშანი პოსტმოდერნიზმისა (არ ჩანს დისტანციური ნარაცია, ირონიზება და ა.შ.), რაც არ უნდა იყოს გასაკვირი ტექსტების ბუნებიდან გამომდინარე – ორივე წარმოადგენს განმცდელი პერსონას ბავშვობისდროინდელ სენტიმენტალურ ამბავს.

კვლევის მიზანი შესრულებულია, რამდენადაც პოეტურ ტექსტების ანალიზი შესაძლებელი გახდა ნარატოლოგიის მეთოდის დახმარებით. გამოვლინდა: ლექსების სტრუქტურა, სიუჟეტი; განმცდელი ნარატორი, ინსტანცია; როგორ ხდება დროის პრეზენტაცია ტექსტებში.

ქართული ბაროკოს ტენდენციები და ბესარიონ გაბაშვილის შემოქმედება

ანი ჯავახიშვილი — 2023-05-29

The study aims to analyse Georgian literature from the 16th to 18th centuries in comparison with contemporary European literary tendencies using modern literary methodologies. The 16th to 18th centuries were a crucial and special period in European art as this period is characterised by significant discoveries during the scientific revolution, leading to the disappearance of established aesthetic principles and the emergence of new ways of artistic expression. Baroque, encompassing architecture, sculpture, music, painting, theatre, and literature, was a cultural and art movement that reflected a reaction against humanism and the Renaissance. The movement emphasized dramatic, eclectic, and dynamic motion. Baroque is one of the most significant period of the development of European culture as it laid the foundation of the principles of modernism. Modernism itself is often mentioned as Neo-baroque in literary criticism. In Georgian literary studies, the term “Georgian Baroque” was first mentioned in the 1970s by Giorgi Gachechiladze, who identified Baroque tendencies in Georgian literature.

The term refers to Georgian literature from the 16th to 18th centuries, which exhibits eclecticism and is influenced by Persian literature due to political and economic circumstances. However, despite of significant Persian influence, Georgian literature from the 16th to 17th centuries began to reintegrate into the Western cultural-literary space. We can underline some of the key factors: in Georgian literary texts of 16-18th centuries the chronotope of a foreign country and foreign theme is sublimated with a national thematics (“The Martyrdom of the Holy Queen Qetevan” by Teimuraz I, “War of Aspindza” and “War of Rukhisi” by Besarion Gabashvili). Besides, Georgian texts of these period reflects the crisis of humanism aesthetic and reveals the onto-existential problems of the epoch. One of the most important aspects is that, despite the Persian influence, Christian themes gradually reemerge in Georgian literature and eventually take on pagan characteristics. These factors indicate both the political and literary choices made by Georgia during this period.

Besarion Gabashvili, an influential Georgian poet, philosopher, and diplomat of the 18th century, is well-known for his love poems. He was a close person at the court of King Erekle’s palace, and also played an important role in the contemporary Georgian political arena as he was the ambassador of Eastern Georgia to the Russian royal court. Like his contemporary writers, Gabashvili’s works are quite eclectic and often reveal contradictory literary paradigms. However, our research underlines that Gabashvili’s works exhibit Western literary tendencies, particularly signs of the Baroque movement. It is worth mentioning that Georgian modernist poets like Titsian Tabidze considered Besik (Baroque) and Nikoloz Baratashvili (Romanticism) to be his literary ancestors. Titsian tabitze’s quote “I plant Flowers of Evil by Baudelaire in the garden of Besik”, which is reffered as a key determinant of Georgian symbolism,
clearly defines the connection between Georgian Modernism and Besik (Besarion Gabashvili). We believe, only this fact indicates that we should study Besarion Gabashvili’s poetry in the context of Baroque movement.

In the works of Besarion Gabashvili tendencies of Baroque can be detected both on the philosophical-thematic and on the stylistic levels. His poetry is diverse in terms of genres and themes. He wrote two poems abput national thematics: “War of Aspindza” and “War of Rukhishi”. In these poems chronotope is real and the characters are real historical persons. So, the unrealistic chronotope is sublimated by the real historical events. This tendency was first revealed in the works by Teimuraz I (Martyrdom of Queen Ketevan), whith this in mind, works by Besarion Gabashvili continues this literary tendency, which is also revealed in contemporary Western
literary space.

Another significant factor is the fact that Christian and Biblical symbolic emerges powerfully in his works. Moreover, historical and existential problems are often related to Biblical original sin, which is one of the key philosophical aspects of Baroque aesthetics. Biblical and Ghospel symbolics are highly reflected in the ode dedicated to the mother of God, where Maryam is mentioned as holy and sacred mother of crucified Jesus.

According to Besarion Gabashvili’s poetry, life is governed by fate, which is a devilish event. This contradicts the humanistic model of world perception, which believed that evil will be always defeated by kindness. In works by Besarion Gabashvili a metaphor of a human is a traveler who travels all along the world in both real and phantastic chronotope, but he can never find a peaceful place and concludes that the world is a destructive place and man is doomed to suffer. Even love is also an expression of suffering - the lover always rejects the lyrical hero.

Based on the analysis of the works by Besarion Gabashvili, we can underline that the emergence of Baroque tendencies is a natural and logical event for Georgian literature. The fact finds connection with theory of polygenesis mentioned by Walter Moser. The theory suggests that Baroque tendencies emerged independently in different European countries according to the common background of the historicalphilosophical crisis of the region.

ანდაზისა და სიტყვის მასალის კონტექსტური კვლევის ზოგიერთი საკითხი

მარინე ტურაშვილი — 2023-05-29

In oral histories important place is occupied by folklore genres such as legends, oral traditions, proverbs, aphorisms, traditional sayings, anecdotes, explanations, charms and so on-that are very popular among contemporary population who reveal great interest to them up today. During the research of the proverbs and traditional sayings we confront with certain problems as their allegorical meaning is not connected to a certain fact, accordingly for making sense of them it is necessary to investigate them in the context. Such opportunity was given in the oral histories. The topic of investigation of proverbs and traditional sayings became our aim during fieldwork when we discovered that population used it wide scale, especially aged people. Later when we started the study of the theoretical material on this topic we discovered that the problem was brought forward still in 1957 by folklorist Pikria Zandukeli. She marked that during fieldwork in Upper Imereti she could not find a narrator who managed to make a list of proverbs alike samples of other genres, though she had a chance to collect them when the narrator used them during narration for strengthening the facts throughout story telling. Hence it is clear that people used proverbs and traditional sayings for confirming and turning stronger their opinion in the context (Zandukeli 1964: 148-149). If we look through the history of inestigation of proverbs we can discover diversity of researches. In 1953 prof. M. Chikovani in old Georgian literature discovered that the word “Proverb” was used in the meaning of “a short story” too. Parnaoz Ertelishvili took attention to the figurative meaning of proverbs
(1957). On the problem of proverb a broad investigation was made by prof. Ksenia sikharulidze (1960).

In the Vth volume of the “Folk Wisdom” published in 1964 scientist L. Lejhava divided proverbs into 8 groups: 1. Simple proverbs; 2. Proverbial expressions; 3 Aphorisms; 4. Proverbs; 5. Parables; 6. Proverbial sayings; 7. Blessing and cursing formulae; 8. Separate strophes from folk poetry.

Presented investigation gives the contextual analysis of proverbs and traditional sayings. Why these two? We think that it is difficult to mark out the boundaries of them as sometimes one part of a proverb is spread independently and is transformed into traditional saying. A proverb is a simple, one-sentence saying expressing perceived truth based on common sense or experience. If we run over the history of the topic we will have various pictures. That was the object of investigation of many scientists. Publication of proverbs started in XIX century. The first publication of proverbs is dated to 1846 in “Chrestomathy of Georgian Literature” by D. Chubinashvili. In 1876 P. Umikashvili published the collection of the Georgian proverbs. Presented investigation is based on the following academic publications: Folk Wisdom IV and Folk Literature II by P. Umikashvili. The texts for the comparative analysis were
compared to the published materials and unpublished ones kept in the Data Base http://www.folktreasury.ge/ARPA/. Materials of the oral history were used from the collection of “Millennium in Interior” (2011) and video recordings of the folklore expedition (2009) kept in the Folklore Archive of Shota Rustaveli Institute of Georgian Literature (Cipher FA1K1). The investigation includes published interviews, too. For the quantity of the material it was not possible to present the whole data, though wide chapter will be published in the doctoral dissertation. As we see the material recorded from the oral histories is significant from the point of view of observing the proverbs in the context, the method of investigation is novelty. We don’t share the opinion that a proverb has a petrified form, investigating them in the oral histories we see that they are varied. Traditional sayings are part of them and are often called witticisms. In her investigation “On the Relationship Between Proverbs and Traditional Sayings” Pikria Zandukeli considers that a proverb is a complete sentence and the traditional saying is its part. Other difference between them is that a proverb is multinumbered logically, while a traditional saying is one-numbered. The third difference is followingtraditional saying is lacking complete skill of discussion. Investigation revealed that proverb and traditional saying is widely used in conversation for turning stronger and firmer a certain idea, opinion (Zandukeli 1964).

Folklorist G. Chelidze took attention to the specific feautures of proverbs: laconicism, expressiveness and one planess. Scientist T. Kurdovanidze marked out oppositional pairs in proverbs. Scientist L. Bregadze studied the Georgian proverbs published in 1881-1913 and dedicated a broad research to them.

Respodents talking on social, cultural, traditional, religious and philosophical topics used correctly corresponding proverbs and traditional sayings. There was also revealed variational diversity. Thus the material under investigation showed that proverbs and traditional sayings are closely connected to the way of life up today not losing topicality.

მითების სტრუქტურა

მირჩა ელიადე — 2023-05-29

მშობლიური და მამობრივი სიყვარული თანამედროვე სლოვენიურ პოეზიაში

მარსელო პოტოკო — 2023-05-29

სტატიაში განხილულია მშობლობის თემა (დედობრივი და მამობრივი სიყვარული) თანამედროვე (მეორე მსოფლიო ომის შემდგომ) სლოვენურ პოეზიაში. იგი ეფუძნება ჰიპოთეზას, რომ მოტივი სლოვენურ პოეზიაში ჩნდება როგორც იდილიური წარმოდგენებით, ასევე წარმოდგენებით, რომლებიც პრობლემურია მამობის ტრადიციულ სახესთან მიმართებაში. ნაშრომში გაანალიზებულია ომისშემდგომი სლოვენური პოეზიის მკვლევრის მიერ შერჩეული ავტორები (მილა კაჩიჩი, ნეჟა მაურერი, უროშ ზუპანი, პრიმოჟ ჩუჩნიკი და მაია ვიდმარი). ავტორი ყურადღებას ამახვილებს მშობლისგან ბავშვი განცალკევების თემაზე და ცდილობს განსაზღვროს, შედის თუ არა ეს თემა ტრადიციულ ჰარმონიულ მსოფლაღქმაში, როგორც მეტაფიზიკური აუცილებლობა, თუ გარკვეულ ტექსტებში არსებობს დაძაბულობა განცალკევების აუცილებლობის მიღებასა და უარყოფას შორის.

პოეტური ტექსტების ყურადღები წაკითხვა ცხადყოფს, რომ იდილიური წარმოდგენები მშობლობის შესახებ, რომელიც იქმნება სამყაროს ჰარმონიული სურათიდან და მასში ბავშვისა და მშობლის როლიდან, შეინიშნება იმ ვტორებთან, რომელთა პოეზია უფრო პირადული, კონფესიური; განსაკუთრებით, ინტიმიზმის ავტორებსა და მათ მიმდევრებში, ასევე, ეგრეთწოდებულ ნეოინტიმისტებში.

მსგავსი იდეალისტური სახეები, პირიქით, არ გვხვდება მათ პოეზიაში, ვინც მოდერნისტებს მიეკუთვნებიან. ასეთ პოეზიაში მამობა
მეტწილად გარდაიქმნება ან ფორმალურ ექსპერიმენტად (ჩუჩნიკი) ან ეგზისტენციალურ იდეად (ვიდმარი).

ლევ ტროცკი ლიტერატურასა და რევოლუციას შორის

მერაბ ღაღანიძე — 2023-05-29

Leon Trotsky (1879-1940), one of the leaders of the Bolshevik coup of 1917 and the subsequent Soviet state, resting at the government cottage in the summer of 1922, when he was People’s Commissar of Military Affairs of the Russian Federative
Socialist Republic, decided to edit his previously published articles on literature and to publish them as a single collection, but then he resolved to gradually expand and postpone its completion to the following summer, 1923: during this time the collection was reworked, expanded, filled with new material and soon after the end of the work, in the autumn of the same year 1923, published as a book, titled: “Literature and Revolution”.

At that time, Trotsky already held the position of the People’s Commissar of Military and Naval Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, although not only this circumstance caused the work of the famous Bolshevik to receive a wide response in the Soviet Union and various countries of the world. The collection of articles was soon translated into many languages and gradually published in almost every country. The book, in an abbreviated form, was also published in Georgia in 1926.

The collection of texts of different content, purpose and scope conveys, of course, shows the personal literary views and impressions of the leader of the revolution himself, but at the same time, the whole book is an eloquent source for understanding how he or the founders and ideologists of Bolshevism. saw the place and importance of literature or, more broadly, art in the communist state.

One circumstance should also be taken into account: it might be assumed that, since the Leninist-Trotskyist period of Bolshevik ideology differed in its attitude towards art (even the formal aspects) from the Stalinist period, it would be expected that the book would show a clear difference from the directions of the ideologicalartistic dimension, took in the Soviet Union, that followed, such as the 1930s-1940s, but it is remarkable that the inheritance between these two periods is visible and clear.

The book discusses the relationship between literature and politics, individual writers and their literary works, but also the issues of theater and painting, sculpture and architecture, and the artists of these artistic fields.

In general, Trotsky believes that art is crucial to the evaluation of each epoch, because “the development of art is the highest test of the vitality and significance of each epoch”. Accordingly, art is the highest and visible manifestation of life, but according to the author of the book, as a materialist, as a Marxist, material provision is necessary for artistic achievements, that is, a poor environment cannot create, cannot bring high culture: “for art, you need wealth, you need abundance”, “for the culture to increase, complicate and improve, a material increase is needed”. Thus, from this point of view, only prosperity will bring great art as a result, and in this situation, the personal aspirations of the artist are given less importance. It is worth noting that, according to the leader of the revolution, even the revolution itself, that is, the age of excitement, is barren for creating a creative environment.

It is noteworthy that, from Trotsky’s point of view, art not only reflects reality but also shapes it, – in each case, it is art that helps the proletariat as a group to find its face. But, at the same time, for the author, as a materialist, there is no doubt that the word reflects the action and the matter is primary.

At the same time, Trotsky believes that a work of art should be evaluated not from an ideological point of view, but from its essence, its nature. It seems that the intrinsic value of artistic works is separated from each other here, which should be determined based on the dimensions of art (how?), but the explanation of what led to their creation, i.e., what material circumstances gave rise to them (why?), is separated from such assessment. General aesthetic criteria serve and manage to clarify the first one, while for the second one, it is necessary to invoke and use Marxist teaching.

When understanding the essence of literature and, in general, art, one of the founders of Bolshevism faces two almost insurmountable dilemmas, the solution of which will be difficult to find:

First, – works of art are created by individual artists, and according to Marxism, a person exists to the extent that he is a representative of the collective and reflects or expresses the goals and aspirations of the collective. Trotsky, as he is a Marxist,
believes that everything private must disappear in the common; that the individual must merge with the universal; that there must be only a “collective man” and, therefore, the owner must be only a collective. Accordingly, the question arises: is the author of an artistic work the owner or not, that is, the creator and owner of his work, when “the revolution arises from the central idea that the sole owner should become a collective person”. According to this point of view, the establishment of communism should also bring about the abolition of the individual author (as well as his personal responsibility) and the formation of a collective author, a view that was noticeably influenced by the creation of the communist state and in the early days of its existence. But Trotsky still turns aside the judgment of such issues arising around him, and even when he discusses the writings standing against the revolution (which he calls “pre-October literature” and the vast majority of whose representatives found themselves in exile at that time), as a whole, about complete ideological or artistic exhaustion, still discusses individual Russian authors and their books.

It is significant that, on the one hand, Trotsky declares: “Bourgeois poetry, of course, does not exist, because poetry is a free art, not a class service”, but immediately retreats, because these words published earlier he received serve critics from an experienced and well-read journalist (of course, a Marxist), because, according to him, these “sarcastic words were perceived in a positive sense”. And this welleducated journalist himself undoubtedly proved the “class character of literature” for him, which, even though it can be seen from the ironic context, was clear and unquestionable for the author of the book.

Second, – Leon Trotsky, as a literarily educated and culturally developed person, cannot in any way deny the impermanent, unshakable cultural value of the art of the past, the so-called classical art, and openly admits that, unlike this art, the socalled
proletarian art and, in particular, literature lags behind its predecessor, i.e. feudal or bourgeois-capitalist art with Marxist names. But, in the view of the revolutionary, overcoming this backwardness is only a matter of time.

It must be said that, despite of the author’s respectful idea related to the book “Literature and Revolution” and the responses that the publication received, from the point of view of literary criticism, it is very mediocre. Despite the literary confidence of the famous revolutionary, the collection seems to have had a predominantly political purpose.

ცენზორის ინსტიტუტი XIX საუკუნის 50-70-იანი წლების ქართული გამოცდილების კონტექსტში

თამარ შარაბიძე — 2023-05-29

Russia’s censorship policy in the Caucasus is part of the imperial-colonial goals that the highest authorities of this country had towards the people of the Caucasus. Specifically, the censorship policy of the empire in Georgia fought against the idea of the national identity of the Georgian people and the restoration of an independent Georgian state, and the people who dedicatedly fought for the realization of this idea.

The history of Russian censorship in the Caucasus and Georgia officially begins in the middle of the 19th century, namely, from 1848, when the Caucasus Censorship Committee was established, which was the official institution implementing Russia’s chauvinist-colonial policy in the Caucasus and Georgia in particular. However, the pre-history of Russian censorship is longer and more loaded with imperial content, because its goal was much more difficult, namely: the abolition of the Georgian kingdom-principalities, the incorporation of all of Georgia into the imperial space, the Russification of the country.

When we get acquainted with a lot of materials that reflect the intelligence activities of people with special tasks sent to Georgia by the Russian government, starting from Peter the Great, ending with the activities of people sent by the emperors Paul and Alexander, we realize that controlling the current events in our country was a priority of the Russian government’s foreign policy.

Russia’s censorship policy controlled everything that the empire needed to preserve the conquered country, to study the moods and aspirations of all its citizens, to punish those who dared to turn to the past, to completely assimilate the population and to kill forever the idea of independence in the people.

Some time before the conquest of Georgia, the officials sent on a special mission got to know the local political, economic and cultural situation, created the ground for the conquest of the country, and after the conquest, the committees with the chief rulers had a special task of studying the mood of the population and the thought of the creative elite (Kovalensky, Knoring, Musin-Pushkin, etc.). The information obtained as a result of this control was sent to the ruler of the Caucasus, who in turn reported this information to the highest authority, the emperor himself. The multivolume set of acts compiled by the Caucasus Archaeological Commission is full of such information.

Before the conquest of the Kingdom of Kartl-Kakheti, the so-called duty of “Chief Censor” was performed by Petre Kovalenski, an official specially sent to Georgia by Emperor Paul I. He recorded the views of interesting political figures, informal settings and thoughts expressed during meetings, and prepared the ground for Russia’s conquest of the Caucasus. At the beginning of the 60s of the XIX century, before the release of the Acts, Adolphe Berge published “Councilor of State Petre Kovalensky’s Notes on Georgia”. It clearly shows how Kovalensky tried to influence the king of Kartli-Kakheti through personal conversations, to confront him with the Caucasian khanates, including those who were in friendly relations with the royal court of Georgia, he organized inspirations by bringing down the division between the kings and princes within Georgia itself, and all this was part of the imperial policy of Russia.

A special conclusion based on complete control over the population led to the creation of the secret police in 1831, which is nothing more than the imposition of complete censorship on the actions and desires of the Georgian people. On May 23, 1831, Adjutant-General Benkendorf was addressed by the governor of the Caucasus, General Ivan Paskevich, and presented the project of creating a secret military police in Transcaucasia, with the center in Tbilisi. It consisted of 29 paragraphs and the establishment of prospective personnel. The project was approved by Emperor Nicholas I on July 7 of the same year. In its very first paragraph, significant words have been stated: “Among the population of Georgia and other provinces of Transcaucasia, which in most cases were subdued by the power of Russian weapons, there are many people who, as a result of wrong thinking, do not look at the Russians as protectors,
but as conquerors, and therefore they are hostile to the Russian government” (Acts 1878: 343).

Due to the existing situation, the author of the project proposes to the emperor a number of secret intelligence measures, which will prevent the government from conspiracies, anxiety, etc. Paragraph 8 of the project states that in provinces, regiments, judicial institutions, ports, customs, border quarantines, foreign consulates and generally in places where foreign citizens gather, the secret police was to have their own secret agents; Paragraph 9 states that the postal service should check and monitor suspicious correspondence and possible encrypted information contained therein. Paragraph 10 states that even the clothes and personal belongings of suspicious persons should be secretly searched when crossing the border. Paragraph 19 states that the secret police should always be on the lo-okout for “people who are free-thinkers and insolent against religion and the government”.

Paragraph 24 deals with military units; Secret Service officials were to find out if there were “secret societies among the officers, or parties malicious in their content, or intrigues of any kind, and from whom they originated” (Acts 1878:343-345).

As we can see, the newly formed secret police agency is becoming a very powerful weapon in the hands of the Russian imperial state. Its main purpose was to detect and prevent events similar to the conspiracy of 1832, however, national forces always acted against it, and the secret police could not reveal the conspiracy until December 9, 1832.

Censorship was tightened in 1837, when Russian Emperor Nicholas I arrived in Georgia for the first time. From the memories of Luka Isarlov, an eyewitness of the events, who later became the “fierce censor” of the Caucasus Censorship Committee, it is clear how extensive the censorship was everywhere and on everything, so that this visit could end peacefully. We can consider December 23, 1837 as the beginning of the history of the censorship of the Georgian printed press, when by the order of the Russian emperor, censorship of the books coming out of the printing house was entrusted to the office of the governor of Georgia, and the teachers of Tbilisi gymnasium were appointed as censors.

It is true that official censorship was imposed on print production and it had cruel forms, but due to the fact that a small volume of the printed literature was published in Georgia at that time, publications were monitored by the governor-general of the Caucasus until the end of the 40s. The government did not consider it necessary to establish a special Caucasian censorship committee.

The establishment of the Caucasian Censorship Committee in 1848 had several reasons related to both local and international historical events.
1) The revolutions of 1848 in European countries scared the Russian government. It decided to prevent the possible spread of ideas and literature coming from Europe, especially since involvement in the revolutions earned Russia the name of the “Gendarme of Europe” and undermined its international authority. The desire to prevent possible events forced the imperial authorities to establish the Caucasus Censorship Committee.
2) A lengthy Caucasian war was going on, which threatened the eventual conquest of the Caucasus by the Russian Empire. At such a time, by implementing a strict censorship policy, the imperial government excluded free thought among “foreigners”.
3) The establishment of the Caucasus Censorship Committee, we think, was the result of the activity of the liberation movement of the Georgian people, which started immediately after the abolition of the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti, did not stop until the 40s and weakened Russia’s positions in the Caucasus.
4) We think that the establishment of the censorship committee against the background of the newly introduced Viceroy institution in the Caucasus and its goals prove once again the perfidious nature of the soft power policy of the empire and its loyal Viceroy Mikhail Vorontsov.

Russia could not appear as a complete rejector of liberalism, and on April 18, 1865, Alexander II granted some freedom to the press, which marked the beginning of the reform of censorship. On January 26, 1863, the Ministry of Internal Affairs was assigned the task of monitoring literature and journalism, and it was considered necessary to develop new protective mechanisms in the legislation. A special commission was created, the chairman of which was D. Obolensky, according to whom, the same liberal reforms as in other areas should be reflected in the printing business. In 1863, Obolensky had already developed a project on printing, the main censorship authority became the “Main Department of Printing”, and on September 13, 1865, a law was passed, according to which state and academic scientific publications, classical literature texts, and their translations should be exempted from censorship. In the empire, the appropriate policy was carried out towards all the people.

Observing the documents of the Caucasus Censorship Committee allows us to show what the situation was in this regard in the Caucasus, in particular, how the laws were implemented in Georgia.

It was clear to the central government of Russia that it could not suppress the culturally different peoples included in the empire and could not change the identity of the Caucasians by force of arms alone; Therefore, they allowed a certain revival of national culture in relation to Georgia. Such a policy would have preserved Russia’s liberal appearance and, obviously, would not endanger the existence of an integral state.

Georgian national figures use the Russian policy of this period and get national affairs in order. From the materials of the 480th fund preserved in the National Archives of Georgia, it is clear that the newly established Caucasus Censorship Committee was less active at the beginning; Its implementation started relatively later, which was caused by the expansion of publications, coverage of political, social and national problems in them. At the same time, it is conceivable that at the beginning the action
specifics of the committee were not fully refined yet. Its transition from being under the jurisdiction of the Caucasus Educational District and then the Ministry of Education to the Ministry of Internal Affairs (1863) and then (1867) directly to the Governor of the Caucasus shows that it acquired special state importance.

Since the mid-70s, the committee’s field of action has been expanding, if previously three censors and chairmen were in charge, then the number of states increased and control over the publishing activities of Stavropol, Tergi and Kuban provinces was added. In general, observation of the archives of the Caucasus Censorship Committee reveals that special tightening of the printing business in the state began in 1875, which is obviously related to the above-mentioned reform, during which (1874) the activity of the Caucasus Censorship Committee was expanded and its staff increased. It should also be noted that the work with individual nationalities of the Caucasus in the 70s is still in the process of development, in Georgia there is a period of relative warming in this regard, the study of national history and ethnography is allowed, which the local national forces are taking advantage of and are starting to care for the revival of Georgian culture;

In the 70s, the work of Dimitri Purtseladze, Dimitri Bakradze and activities of others, the names of whom may still be revealed arouses special interest in this regard. Censorship Committee shows special vigilance towards revolutionary persons. Since mid 70s of the 19th century, censorship work becomes relatively stricter. This strictness will increase later.

The materials of the Caucasus Censorship Committee - the committee charter and circulars, the correspondence of the main division of the Viceroy’s Chancellery with the committee and the resolutions of the Department of Internal Affairs give us a perfect idea of the management of imperial cultural and educational activities; It sheds light not only on the history of the struggle for freedom of expression, but also helps to determine the main principles and trends of the mechanisms of influencing and manipulating public opinion at the time, which is especially important for us in the context of modern “information wars”.

დებიუტი ნიკო ნიკოლაძისა (ალექსანდრე ორბელიანის კვალზე)

როსტომ ჩხეიძე — 2023-05-29

ჯოისი და გოეთე: “Un noioso funzionario”?

ირაკლი ცხვედიანი — 2023-05-29

James Joyce regarded Goethe as being in the great writers’ “Holy Trinity” along with Dante and Shakespeare. However, his attitude towards the great German author seems to be ambivalent. He once noted that Ulysses (than in the planning stages) would depict an “Irish Faust”. Later, in 1915, Joyce’s attitude seems to have changed – he refers to Goethe as “un noioso funzionario” – as a figure of bourgeois conformity. He told Frank Budgen that Faust was an inadequate model for his new hero: “Far from being a complete man, he isn’t a man at all. Is he an old man or a young man? Where are his home and family? We don’t know. And he can’t be complete because he is never alone. Mephistopheles is always hanging round him at his side or heels”.

Compared to other great literary figures like Homer, Dante, and Shakespeare, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe appears to play a relatively small role in Joyce’s work. Some critics point out that while there are passing references to Goethe in Joyce’s fiction and private correspondence, none of Goethe’s specific works seem to have served as important models or inspirations for any of Joyce’s, and little of Joyce’s technique as a writer seems especially similar to Goethe’s. However, I would argue, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Ulysses provide enough material for a more systematic comparative study.

Richard Ellmann argues that Joyce’s “connections with Goethe in Ulysses are less overt than the connections with Homer. They are, however, deeply ingrained.” Ellmann was by no means the first to highlight the potential in this particular line of critical inquiry. In the very year in which Ulysses was published John Middleton Murry described “Circe”-Nighttown episode as a kind of ‘Walpurgisnacht’ of Joyce’s protagonists. This astute observation seemingly found approval with the author himself, as Stuart Gilbert, whom Joyce assisted in writing the first full-length study of Ulysses, attempts to illustrate Murry’s parallel there in some detail.

Joyceans, however, are not alone in identifying connections of this sort between Goethe and the Irishman: Germanists, for instance, Barker Fairley, even if only briefly, have hinted at possible parallels as well, summarizing Faust as a possible “forerunner of Ulysses”. Cyrus Hamlin takes this further, when, with regard to the “encyclopedic” quality of Faust, he suggests that “one might look to Joyce’s Ulysses for a similar range of styles and diversity of incidents joined together in a thematic or symbolic way.” Again, more recently, Donald Riechel has even posed the question whether it might be best to read Faust “as an anticipation of Joyce’s art in Ulysses”. Robert Weninger offers an intertextual reading of Goethe’s Bildungsroman Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre — with its extensions Wilhelm Meisters theatralische Sendung and Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre — and Joyce’s A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916) and Ulysses (1922), engaging in literary historical parallax — a parallactic reading of the novels’ protagonists Wilhelm Meister and Stephen Dedalus, as regards not just their identification with Shakespeare’s Hamlet but also the symbolic connotations embedded in their names and mythological pretexts. Derived from astronomy, the term parallax designates, transferred to literary history, a narrative stratagem, a metapoetical rationale, and an interpretive method. Joyce employs it as a key concept and narrative tool in Ulysses to denote a stereoscopic perspective applied to the protagonists’ actions and the world they live in. Leopold Bloom thus reflects on it and the technique of Ulysses is determined by it. On a higher plane, literary critics, too, engage in literary historical parallax whenever they read texts intertextually — as exemplified in Weninger’s essay. This approach allows us to shed new light on the roles and significance of narrative irony, chance, and paternity in these novels.

M. Keith Booker suggests reading Joyce in the light of Bakhtin’s emphasis on the chronotope of prosaic development that informs Goethe’s use of the bildungsroman genre, usefully illustrating aspects of Joyce’s work. Bakhtin discusses the genre of the
bildungsroman in the context of his concept of chronotope. He discovered “Goethe’s startling ability to see time in space”, the purely Joycean quality.

In spite of these and other speculative, passing comments by influential critical authorities, however, with the exception of one or more specific comparative analyses over the years, the field of Goethe-Joyce studies remains largely uncultivated. The academy’s reluctance to react to the repeated prompts of major Goethe and Joyce scholars owes much to the absence of a far-ranging, expansive, and general context in which one might undertake a comparison of the two writers. Therefore, the purpose of the present paper is to explore some intertextual connections between the two authors as manifested in Ulysses as well as outline some possible contours of the systematic comparative study.

ვებ-რომანები, როგორც კულტურული ტრანსფერის საშუალებები მსოფლიოს მასშტაბით. აღმოსავლეთსა და დასავლეთს შორის კულტურული ისტორიების გადახედვა

ანეტ სიმონისი — 2023-05-29

ვებ მხატვრული ლიტერატურა სულ უფრო და უფრო პოპულარული ხდება. 21-ე საუკუნის დასაწყისიდან ვებ რომანების გლობალური გავლენა სტაბილურად ფართოვდება. გამოქვეყნების სერიული ფორმა ყველაზე მიმზიდველია, თუმცა, ტრანსპოზიცია სხვადასხვა მედია ფორმატში ასევე ზრდის ნარატივების გავრცელებას მთელ მსოფლიოში. გასაკვირი არ არის, რომ ინტერნეტ გამოცემის ფორმა ხელს უწყობს კულტურულ გაცვლას, ეხმარება ნარატივების მთელი მსოფლიოს მასშტაბით გავრცელებას. ჩინური ვებ რომანების წარმოება და თარგმნა, მათი აღფრთოვანებით მიღება დასავლეთში (აშშ, კანადა, დიდი ბრიტანეთი, ესპანეთი, გერმანია, რუსეთი და ა.შ.) შეიძლება თანამედროვე კითხვის ტრანსნაციონალური და ტრანსკულტურული დინამიკის თვალსაჩინო მაგალითად ჩაითვალოს. მას შემდეგ, რაც ჩინურ ვებ-რომანს კითხულობს მილიონობით უცხოელი გულშემატკივარი, ძირითადად, ინგლისურ თარგმანებში, მას, ხშირად, „ქვეყნის ყველაზე წარმატებულ კულტურულ ექსპორტად“ მოიხსენიებენ.

რამდენად მოიცავს საერთაშორისო მკითხველების ინტერესები ჩინეთის ისტორიასა და კულტურას და რამდენად არის განსახილველი პუბლიკაციები მიმართული სოციალური ინტერაქციის ტრანსნაციონალური გლობალური კონცეფციისკენ, კონკრეტული კულტურული მემკვიდრეობის შეზღუდვების მიღმა? კონკრეტულად რა არის ლიტერატურული მახასიათებლები და მოთხოვნები, რომლებიც ხელს შეუწყობს მათ სწრაფ გავრცელებას მთელს მსოფლიოში? ეს საკითხები დეტალურადაა განხილული, ვებ რომანის სხვადასხვა ქვეჟანრისა და მათი თარგმნისა და მიღების პროცესების დინამიკის მიხედვით.

მედია-ხელოვნება და "ჩაცმადი" ტექნოლოგია: მედიისა და ხელოვნების გადააზრება პოსტ-მედიატურ ფორმებში

სოოჯინ ქვონი — 2023-05-29

როდესაც მარშალმა მაკლუინმა თქვა: „ტანსაცმელი, [არის] კანის გაფართოება…“, ტექნოლოგიები უკვე სცდებოდა ადამიანური წარმოსახვის საზღვრებს. ჩვენ გვაიძულეს ტექნოლოგიების ერთგვარი ეჭვით მიღება; როგორ ჩავწეროთ ტრადიციები ხელოვნების პოსტ-მოდერნისტულ მოსახვევში?

სტატიაში განხილულია ფრიდრიხ კიტლერის „ვიზუალური მედიების“ როლი და მნიშვნელობა თანამედროვე მედიაციურ საზოგადოებაში, სადაც ვიზუალური ხელოვნების ინტერ-ტრანსმედიალური მედიუმები შემოქმედებით მეთოდებს წარმოადგენენ. ასევე, შესწავლილია, თუ როგორ ვლინდება პერფორმაციული მოტივები თანამედროვე ხელოვნებაში და "ჩაცმადი"~ ტექნოლოგიები პერფორმანსებში. მედია-ინსტალაციებისა და პერფორმანსების შემოქმედი „ბილ შენონი“ იკვლევს ვიდეოინსტალაციებს, რომლებიც ტექნოლოგიების საშუალებით, ორიენტირებულია სხეულზე, რათა პრაქტიკაში გამოავლინონ „კანის გამაფართოებელი“ მოძრაობა, როგორც თავის დროზე მაკლუინი აცხადებდა. ამ ანალიზის ორი უმთავრესი მიმართულებაა, თუ როგორ ვითარდებოდნენ მედიები ადრეული კინოს ეპოქიდან თანამედროვეობამდე, როგორც ხელოვნების სახეები და როგორ იცვლებოდა ტექნოლოგია, პოსტმოდერნისტულ ძვრებთან ერთად, კულტურულ ფორმებში. სტატიის ავტორი შეეცადა აეხსნა ეს ორი ასპექტი ბილ შენონის, იონგჰუი კიმის, კიენ კიმის და იკეჩუი ჰიროტოს `ჩაცმადი~ მედიის ხელოვნების მეშვეობით; ასევე, განეხილათ შესაძლო თვალსაზრისები იმის შესახებ, თუ როგორ უწყობს ხელს ციფრული მედია `ჩაცმადი~ ტექნოლოგიების მიმართ ახალ მიდგომებს, მედიისა და აპარატურის "ჩაცმადი"~ მოწყობილობების ტრადიციულ ხელოვნების კონცეფციებზე ზეგავლენის თვალსაზრისით.

მიხეილ ჯავახიშვილის პროზის ზოგიერთი საკითხი და შერვუდ ანდერსონის გროტესკული ადამიანი

ნესტან კუტივაძე — 2023-05-29

The beginning of the 20th century turned out to be an important period for the whole world in terms of state, public and social-cultural development. Worldview changes led to many noteworthy events of the subsequent period, and it included not only those countries where the most difficult process of changing formations was underway, but also those ones where new prospects for social and economic development started to emerge. In this regard, radically different processes were taking place in Georgia and the United States of America. Objective realities create different socio-economic and public situations in any country, and the peripeteias of a person’s spiritual existence always cross the boundaries of this concreteness. Along with the individual aspirations, people also have similar, common yearnings which are reflected in fiction with all the national-individual alterations.

The era of social transitions is always hard and difficult for people, no matter what stratum of society they belong to. The aim of the present paper is to show the peculiarities of the literary conceptualization of one problem accompanying the social changes on the example of the works of prominent writers of the 20th century: Mikheil Javakhishvili (1880-1937) and Sherwood Anderson (1876- 1941).

In his short stories and novels Sherwood Anderson depicted the problems of ordinary Americans at the beginning of the 20th century. As it is known, the author achieved success as a writer of psychological short stories. In his works, he shifted the emphasis from the plot structure to description of the feelings of helpless, spiritually broken people who are tired of life. In this respect, one of the most successful collections “Winesburg, Ohio” (1919) by Sherwood Anderson should be singled out. Winesburg is a fictional place inhabited by the people who are alienated from the society and one other, and they shelter themselves in the illusory world of ideas. At first glance, it seems that everything is the result of their impracticality, and not the environment in which they live.

Anderson’s “Winesburg, Ohio” begins with the short story “The Book of Grotesques”, in which the author defines a general set of features characteristic of a certain group of people and in its manifestation he categorizes this diverse phenomenon under one name – grotesque. Anderson believes that most ordinary people are grotesque. Their souls are fragmented and broken. Those who are in such a situation can no longer find the strength in themselves to overcome obstacles and make things happen, which cannot be explained only by their personal characteristics.

The artistic face of a spiritually broken, helpless person is well known in Georgian literature, and its formation has its own literary tradition. In the literature of the beginning of the 20th century, it is characterized by the great tragedy and is used as a way of artistic depiction of an unacceptable reality.

Mikheil Javakhishvili, one of the most prominent writers of Georgian literature of the 20th century, refers to these people as “a former man”, “a superfluous man”. In one of his notable novels, “Givi Shaduri”, the prose writer not only portrays such people, but generalizes the common characteristic features of the event in this artistic face.

Anderson’s grotesque man and Javakhishvili’s former man are of the same character in its essence. They emerge during significant changes but in qualitatively different environments. Their lives are shattered, they combine the tragic and comic sides of existence. They are products of the environment.

The characters of Anderson and Javakhishili both suffer from feeling weak and helpless. It is also difficult for them to take responsibility for changing something. George Willard saves himself by running away before becoming a grotesque himself. In this way, he protests against the unacceptable environment whereas Givi Shaduri is no longer trying to change anything in his life.

Teimuraz Khevistavi, the main character of Mikheil Javakhishvili’s prophetic novel “Jakos Khiznebi” (Jaqo’s Dispossessed), has many characteristic features of Anderson’s grotesque man. Unlike Givi Shaduri, Khevistavi believes that he cannot be broken spiritually.

It is precisely because of literary conventionality, exaggeration, that these people usually have sharply defined individual characteristics, which, at first glance, leaves the impression that their personal traits and not the external factors determine their own tragedy. However, it is impossible to ignore the fact that the crisis caused by social and other types of circumstances creates the environment where these weak, hopeless people are formed often in the captivity of illusions. Through artistic invariants, literature reflects the influence of such factors and the diversity of specific manifestations.

A person’s fate in society is significantly determined by the nature and severity of the changes taking place in this society; In its essence, a grotesque man and a former man express one and the same phenomenon – a broken, weak being who is unable to deal with reality due to certain social and public circumstances. Since this type was formed in the background of the fiercest class conflict in Georgian literature of the 20th century, it acquired a more sarcastic and ironic coloring than Anderson’s grotesques, some of which have even been depicted as beautiful and attractive by the writer.

XX საუკუნის დისტოპიური რომანის სათავეებთან – ევგენი ზამიატინის „ჩვენ“

ირინა ნოზაძე — 2023-05-29

The 20th century prominent Russian writer Yevgeny Zamyatin’s novel “We” belongs to one of the subgenres of social fiction – Dystopia. His dystopian novel precedes the dystopias of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell. It is significant that George Orwell considered himself as the successor of Zamyatin’s novel. As one of the best representatives of the genre of fantasy and science fiction of the 20th century, American writer and literary critic Ursula Kreber Le Guin notes, Yevgeny Zamyatin’s novel “We” is the greatest science fiction novel that had yet been written.

Although Zamyatin’s “We” came under the pressure of Soviet censorship, it was met with great interest by foreign critics. In his native country, the novel, which was considered as a political mistake, came under fire of mass criticism. “We” was published in Russia only 70 years after it was written. Considering this background, the first Georgian translation of the novel (translator – Tata Nikoladze), which was published in 2018, is of particular importance. In fact, one way or another, it was through this translation that modern Georgian readers got to know with Zamyatin, which created a kind of basis for the rediscovery and study of the not so widely known writer and his novel – “We”.

The novel “We” was written in 1920 – shortly after the writer’s return from England to Russia which was filled with a revolutionary atmosphere (according to some reports, the work on the text continued until 1921). Due to the censorship of Soviet Russia, it was impossible to publish the novel in his homeland, although the writer was reading it at literary evenings in Moscow and Leningrad (Saint Petersburg). Thus, due to wide interest, “We” was distributed as a manuscript. In addition, the novel attracted the attention of foreign readers and Zamyatin received numerous offers to publish it.

The structure of the story – “text within the text” – which is one of the main markers of the novel, is the basis of the process of its creation and realization of the values and interests of the character who has become an author. The form of a diary, the notes add a confessional character to the novel. The main character, who is an apologist for the existing system, tries to use mathematical formulas to prove the wisdom of the principles on the basis of which the One State was formed. The philosophy of forced happiness is perfectly demonstrated by the writer. Freedom, which according to Christian belief is most precious to a man, was shown to us as
delusion in the novel, which is “facilitated” by the writer’s free variation of biblical allusions through irony.

George Orwell unequivocally considered himself as the successor of Zamyatin’s novel “We”, he precisely understood the essence of his originality in the conclusion of a short but accurate review of the novel. In 1906 the Tsarist government imprisoned Zamyatin, in 1922 he suffered the same fate at the hands of the Bolsheviks. By this time, the writer had no excuse to admire the existing political regime, and it is important to note that his novel was not just the result of impulsive anger: “It is in effect a study of the Machine, the genie that man has thoughtlessly let out of its bottle and cannot put back again” (Orwell 1968: 75). It is unlikely that Orwell meant only the process of uncontrolled development of technology in the concept of “machine”, because “machine”, that is, in the 20th century, the human civilization itself was presented to us as an inanimate and uncontrollable object.

At the end of 1945 Zamyatin’s “We” finally ended up in Orwell’s hands and in January 1946 he published a review of the novel in the social-democratic magazine “Tribune”. Orwell was most struck by the similarities between Zamyatin’s “We” and Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World”: “Both books deal with the rebellion of the primitive human spirit against a rationalised, mechanised, painless world […] The atmosphere of the two books is similar, and it is roughly speaking the same kind of society that is being described, though Huxley’s book shows less political awareness and is more influenced by recent biological and psychological theories” (Orwell
1968: 72).

Both George Orwell and Aldous Huxley relied on Zamyatin’s model of the novel (although Huxley did not admit having read Zamyatin’s novel, unlike Orwell, who not only read “We”, but also wrote a review of it). It is clear that Orwell borrowed from Zamyatin not only the plot and main characters, but also many characteristics of the society he describes. American writer, playwright and essayist Kurt Vonnegut, talking in an interview with “Playboy” magazine about his “Player Piano”, has noted that he “cheerfully ripped off the plot of “Brave New World”, whose plot had been cheerfully ripped off from Yevgeny Zamyatin’s “We” (Allen 1999: 93).

According to Huxley, reading of H. G. Wells’s “Men like Gods” caused in him a reaction that turned into a directed obsession, leading to a cynical anti-idealism. Thus, before he had finished reading the book, he had already decided to make an unforgiving parody of the most optimistic utopias of Wells.

Since Huxley deliberately decided to satirize the utopian ideas of Wells, the question arises: where should we look for the foundations of his own dystopian ideas? Zamyatin generously answers this question in an interview with Frédéric Lefebvre: “Pierre Drie La Rochelle told me a few days ago that during the meeting he asked Huxley if he was familiar with my novel. The coincidence, of course, turned out to be accidental. However, such a coincidence suggests that similar ideas are scattered around us, in the ominous air we breathe” (Замятин 1988: 16).

As it’s known, particular events mentioned by Zamyatin in the novel came true in the future and the writer’s position towards certain issues attracts attention even today and does not lose its relevance. Although the novel had to remain in the shadows for some time, we can say for sure that the organized model of the 20th century dystopian novel was first proposed by Yevgeny Zamyatin. In modern literature, there is no doubt that the appearance of the novel “We” in the 20th century gave impetus to the process of establishing a new genre – dystopian novel.

ფერის ფუნქცია და სიმბოლიკა ლექსში "თოვლი"

ქეთევან ჯაშიაშვილი — 2023-05-29

The poem ,,Snow’’ by Galaktion Tabidze is loaded with images closely connected with coloristic metaphors and its relevant significances. The article suggests a number of opinions regarding origins and dynamics of coloristic impressions.

Opening line of the poem invites reader into the picture of particular time and space. The rhythm of space is defined by the word, layering’’ (snow). Due to the slow rhythm of snow accumulation space overpowers image of ordinary everyday scene and is converted into unknown, distant and mysterious dimension.

The composite ,,violet snow’’ draws attention as impossible, unnatural. However, the goal of author is not to colour whole picture into violet. However, while placing together two contrasted colors, whiteness of snow is mixed with violet, so the act of diffusion is transferred into reader’s perception. Therefore, violet tint grants image with transcended dimension and also brings peculiar scent of flower and its image into the sterile white space.

,,Birth’’ of space is delivered by evoking image of bridge. Concept of bridge embodies both transcendent and material significances and represents borderline architectural image. Image of bridge brings additional depth into white environment together with orientation marks like ,,up’’ and ,,down’’ and makes possible light romantic mood in the picture.

Kinetic ontology is revealed in two core regimes: one is vanishing – the unstable substance of snow disappears; images are vanishing below the snow cover as well. And the second – accumulation.

One of the major aspect of the poem is chromatic nature of white – reflection and dissemination. Vision of figures is fragmented therefore relevant to snow. Reader gets impression poet himself finds difficult to discover and connect momentary images in his memory, for this reason images are glittering and consequently dissolving in front of readers’ eyes.

The parallel dynamic of accumulation/filling up is manifested in nonmaterial images. semantic of heaviness and fullness is manifested sometimes directly and other times indirectly: emotional fullness is perceived in charged feelings. However, no culmination or expulsion of emotions is followed, everything disappears somewhere in the air.

Together with white color transparency coexists in the picture. It is the key factor defining foremost textural/coloristic sensations in the poem. This way additional visual dimension is born. Wholeness of transparent substance provides textural framework, unifies fragments of the poem and forms homogenous body of the poem rich in diverse images.

Together with white we can find blue in the poem as well. These two colors function together as depth and dissemination. Blue represents spiritual depth, sublime as it can instantly provide depth to any surface or substance. Hence, the poet has opportunity to mark solidity and mass of materials in the transparent poem or load with weight nonmaterial substances like ,,tired’’ or his own dreams and thoughts.

Massive space of blue desert emerges unexpectedly with words ,,desert, velveted in blue’’. A sight of infinite blue desert is an opposite image to prevailing transparency of ,,crystalline white’’ - perhaps an extremely generalized image of poet’s real life. Image of desert is transcending from reality of poem to abstraction, where real life (experienced in biographical time) and poetry (mysterious but true reality) meet each-other.

Together with white and blue we find green details in the poem. Commonly symbolic meaning of green is linked to vital energy. We see green appearing with materialization of lovers hands. Color of laurel is masterly diluted by the word combination ,,laurels of snow.’’ We are witnessing birth of unique hue formed by mixing green and white. Such precision of color concentration accurately conveys dull emotional vibration of poem’s overall emotion. However, in the part of poem where life energy increases and triumphs over apathy suddenly appear green leaves, as symbol of vitality.

In terms of artistic impact an image of ,,bunch of irises laid down on the snow’’ is standing out. Flowers as plant forms of vital energy are not rare in G. Tabidze’s poetry. Author discovers unique world of flowers where each delicate movement is intended to expose finest physics of the universe.

In the poem ,,Snow’’ movement of irises represents idea of sorrow caused by aging. G. Tabidze proposes the vision of a nature itself: death is nothing more than light sadness because of bunch of irises laid down on the snow. Similar poetic logic is often observed in G. Tabidze’s poetry. For example, in the poem ,,Cemetery’’ an image of orchids falling on the surface of river Nile are associated with the rhythm of recently awaken life. Or enigmatic image ,, On the stairs like vignette laurel leaves are laid”. On connotation level this picture indicates eternal life of soul, its everlasting creative potential.

In the poem ,,Table with Alembiques’’ author brings more clarity to his classification of flowers. In final verse of poem author states a question: ,,What will be with planted flowers?’’ Being ,,planted’’ means direct connection with vital sources of nature, for G. Tabidze it is important aspect for classification of flowers. Therefore, we can conclude that artistic function of flowers is not limited by common symbolic meaning but it acts as complex sign loaded by deep connotations.

We can consider the line ,,I am thirsty of you, so thirsty…” as culmination phase in the poem. It is achieved firstly by repeating the word ,,thirsty’’ two times. Thirst is the strongest representation of human instinct that cannot be dominated. Secondly in this phrase we hear the word ,,home’’ (,,as homeless aspires to home’’) – a tangible and warm, cozy image. However, culmination here is merely conditional, purely emotional. It only draws together semantic vectors into one point.

Like everything else in the poem, mystic image of annunciation has its origin in symbolic meaning of snow: poet is contemplating sky disintegrated into snowflakes. Snow is a primary transcendent category. This vision is an answer that ,,exhausted’’ poet has been waiting for a long time. It’s his hope for overcoming loneliness, sorrow and desperation. According to religious vision on the day of annunciaton transparent body in form of angel descended from the sky. He brought hopeful message to earth: human and divine will finally meet each other. In physical world this massage/sign is a snow. It is a materialization of light, it is potential of coexistence of earthly and supreme. Finally, mankind will get chance of direct contact with transcendent subject. This very fact of snowing creates condition for hope and happiness in cold winter day. In this context can be analyzed symbolic meaning of white and blue: both colors differently represent transcendent substance. For this reason, G. Tabidze makes them principal in the poem.

გლობალური ჭირი, ლოკალური ტკივილი: ურვა კოვიდის ტრაგედიაზე

ჯენიფერ უოლესი — 2023-05-29

კოვიდ 19-ის პანდემიამ რადიკალურად შეგვიცვალა წარმოდგენა საკუთარ თავზე, როგორც გლობალურ, ისე ნაციონალურ თუ ადგილობრივი დონეზე. ჩვენ ვნახეთ ინფექციის ყოვლისმომცველი მასშტაბი, ეროვნული ლოქდაუნები და ვაქცინების გავრცელება, რომელთა დოზების მისაღებად სახელმწიფოები ერთმანეთს ექიშპებოდნენ, გახსნილი საზღვრები კი ხელახლა ჩაიკეტა. ცხარე დებატებმა, ადგილობრივ დონეზე, ნიღბების ტარების აუცილებლობის შესახებ, წამოჭრა საკითხი: რაზე ვფიქრობთ ჩვენ, ინდივიდუალურ თავისუფლებაზე თუ კოლექტიურ პასუხისმგებლობაზე? კოვიდმა გავლენა მოახდინა ადამიანურ ურთიერთობებსა და გლოვის რიტუალზეც.

რა წარმოდგენა გაგვიჩნდა პანდემიის შესახებ ამ გამოცდილების შედეგად? როგორი იყო ლიტერატურისა და ხელოვნების რეაქცია ამ
კრიზისზე? რამდენად შეუძლია ტრადიციულ ლიტერატურას თუ სხვა სახელოვნებო რესურსებს დაგვეხმარონ, გადავიაზროთ ჩვენს საზოგადოებაში მომხდარი ცვლილებები და აღვიქვათ საკუთარი თავი უკანასკნელი ორი წლის გან მავლობაში?

სტატიში განხილულია პანდემიის პარადოქსები: მისი გლობალური გავრცელება და იზოლირების გამომწვევი ეფექტი; ერთსა და იმავე დროს, ურთიერთსიახლოვის სურვილი და შიში; ავადმყოფობა, რომელიც არღვევს საზღვრებს და მაინც, იწვევს მოგზაურობების შეზღუდვას.

წერა პანდემიის დროში

ადა მენდელსონ-მაოზი — 2023-05-29

ერთი შეხედვით, დღემდე შეუძლებელია კოვიდ 19-ის ლიტერატურული გამოვლინებების შესახებ სათანადო კვლევების შემოთავაზება,
რადგან ეპიდემია სრულად არც კი დამთავრებულა. მას ჯერ კიდევ არ გააჩნია ისტორიული პერსპექტივა; დაწერა და, მით უფრო, გამოქვეყნება, მის შესახებ, დროს მოითხოვს.
თუმცა, უკვე არსებობს პირველი ტექსტები კოვიდ 19-ზე. სტატიაში გაანალიზებულია დანი ფრეიბახ-ჰაიფეცის წიგნი „საგანთა უდაბნოში“ (რიცხვები, მეორე კანონი), რომელიც ებრაულად, ივრითზე დაიწერა, პანდემიის პირველი ორი თვის განმავლობაში. (2-3/2020).
წიგნი შედგება სხვადასხვა ჟანრის 113 ფრაგმენტისაგან, რომლებიც მარაოსავით გადაგვიშლიან ხმებს, სახეებსა და ცხოვრებისეულ შეგრძნებებს ეპიდემიის პირობებში – საყოფაცხოვრებო წვრილმანებით დაწყებული (მაგალითად, საკვებთან დამოკიდებულება), უფრო კულტურული და ფილოსოფიური პლასტების ჩათვლით (როგორიცაა, მაგალითად, გარე და შინაგანი სამყაროს კონცეფციები), ერთმანეთთანაა შერწყმული რეალური და ფანტაზიის სამყარო. ეს მიკროისტორიები ქმნის ახალი რეალობის შთაბეჭდილებების გამომხატველ კოლაჟს. წიგნი ორ ვერსიად გამოიცა: ერთი მხოლოდ ტექსტია, მეორეს კი ახლავს მხატვარ იორამ კუპერმინცის 36 ფერადი ფოტო, რომლებიც ტექსტთან სრულყოფილ დიალოგში იმყოფება.

სტატიაში გამოკვლეულია ამ წიგნის სტილისტიკურ მახასიათებლების, როგორიცაა ფრაგმენტების ფორმები, ჟანრების მრავალფეროვნება, ტექსტისა და ვიზუალური სახეების შეხამება და სხვ. კავშირები მისი, როგორც ეპიდემიის ეპიცენტრში შექმნილი პროდუქტის ხასიათთან; ნაჩვენებია ის თემატურ საშუალებები, რომელთა გამოყენება შეუძლია ლიტერატურულ ტექსტს ეპიდემიის დროს, რათა წინ აღუდგეს მსგავსი ექსტრემალური გამოცდილების ტრამვებს: მითები; ყოველდღიური ცხოვრების ცინცხალი გამოცდილება; იუმორი და ფანტაზია; ასევე, კრიტიკულად არის გაანალიზებული ამ ტიპის ტექსტის არს-პოეტიკა.

სტატია იშვიათი ერთობლივი ნამუშევარია მწერლისა და ავტორის, რომელიც, ერთსა და იმავ დროს, არის ფილოსოფოსიც და ლიტერატურის მკვლევარიც. ერთად ისინი ცდილობენ წარმოაჩინონ ლიტერატურის ახალი პერსპექტივები კოვიდ-19-ის პირობებში კერძოდ და ცხოვრება ეპიდემიის პირობებში ზოგადად, ასევე, ის უნიკალური ატრიბუტები, მას რომ მოაქვს.

კონცეპტების "თავისუფალი" და "თავისუფლება" - (“Freiheit”) გაგება ფაუსტის უკანასკნელ, სიკვდილისწინა მონოლოგში და მისი ზღვისპირა კოლონია, როგორც "ტოტალიტარიზმის" - ერთგვარი გოეთესეული ვიზიონი

კონსტანტინე ბრეგაძე — 2023-05-29

The concept of free (“frei”) appears in the Second Part of the Tragedy in Act Five, namely in Faust’s final monologue before death, in line 11580:

Faust:
Free earth: where a free race, in freedom, stand

(“Auf freiem Grund mit freiem Volke stehen”) [V. 11580] (Goethe 2001: 203).

In this line apart from the concept of free, what strikes our attention is:
1. People/race (“Volk”),
2. earth/ground (“Grund”) (This word in German also means ground, earth, base). Whereas the content of the notion of “freedom” and, consequently, “freedom”, which Faust himself conceives of in these notions, must be determined in the context of and
in comparison with the other concepts given in this verse.

At the same time, it is clear that if we want to understand exactly what Faust means by the concept of “free”, then “freedom”, which Faust promises to the people of his colony or abstract humanity in the vague and uncertain future, if we want to understand exactly what he means by it, at a first glance, whether it is a kind of political message or a political will (or, in general, the question is whether the concept of “free” has a political content here), we must define what Faust himself is the voice of this message at the moment. At the same time, it must be clarified, on the one hand, who the “people” are whom Faust promises “standing on free land”, and on the other hand, it must be clarified what kind of “people” his visionary “free people” are.

To accurately define the content of these concepts (“free”, “freedom”, “people”, “land”), the following words of Faust are noteworthy, in which he addresses people working on ports and dams on the seashore:

Faust: I will gain power and property! It’s all business, glory – none! (“Herrschaft gewinn’ ich, Eigentum! / Die Tat ist alles, nichts der Ruhm”). [...] It is ordered to fulfill it rapidly, at all speed! (“Geboten schnell, zu schnell getan!”) [...] The master’s word alone declares what’s right. Up from your beds, you slaves! Man on man! (“Des Herren Wort es gibt allein Gewicht. / Vom Lager auf ihr Knechte! Mann für Mann!”). Reveal the daring of my favoured plan. Seize the tools: on with pick and spade! 11505 Let the end-result be now displayed. Strict order, and swift industry/ then the finest prize we’ll see: And so the greatest work may stand, one mind
equal to a thousand hands. (“Genügt Ein Geist für tausend Hände”). [...] How the clattering of shovels cheers me! It’s the crews still laboring on (“Es ist die Menge, die mir frönet”) [V.10197-10198; 11382; l11501– 11510; 11539-11540] (Goethe 2001: 163, 201, 202).

Thus, in Faust’s dominion, in its seashore colony, there is an obvious tyrannical, authoritarian, dictatorial rule (“Herrschaft”) and a rule similar to that of a totalitarian regime, because the political disposition is of a radically hierarchical structure, where Political is abolished (“das Politische”) (H. Arendt): On the one hand, Faust, who is “lord”, “sovereign” (“Herr”) and lone ruler, the sole political leader, almost the Führer, who is silently obeyed and worshiped by his direct subordinates (like, Mephistopheles), as well as the population of the colony (“I will gain power and prosperity”); On the other hand, his “slaves” («Knechte»), that is, the politically,
economically and socially disenfranchised population of the Faust colony, in Faust›s “terminology” “the mass” (“Menge”) – “it is the mass that worships, obeys, glorifies”; Furthermore: On the one hand, Faust, who, as the unchanging central figure of the elite
ruling class, plans various political, economic, military, or technocratic projects (“One Mind”), who single-handedly issues state orders (compare “take into Hand Shovels and Bars”, “Only the word of the lord has power”, “In time, stand up slaves!”), and he
is Legibus solutus – one who is beyond the law, above the law, and the law does not apply to him, and on the other hand, the lumpen-proletariat, which has become a slave to the construction of seaports, canals, and ports, has become obedient and speechless (“it is commanded to do it quickly, so do it quickly”).

Consequently, the “people” (“Volk”) mentioned by Faust in his visionary words refer not to a politically free population but the “people” as an economic and political instrument, a mass pulling force based on which the political leader (Faust) and his
narrow political elite (Mephistopheles and his three high and strong subordinates) carry out monumental technocratic and economic projects and global colonization. Consequently, the concept of “people” refers to the functionality of people and not to their citizenship.

In Faust’s seaside colony totalitarianism is the type of regime and apart from using total propaganda and repressions – Faust: Spurred by force or hope of pleasure, By pay, enticement or press-gang! (“Und so verbringt, umrungen von Gefahr, / Hier
Kindheit, Mann und Greis sein tüchtig Jahr. / Solch ein Gewimmel möcht ich sehn”) [V. 11577-11579] (Goethe 2001: 203) –mass work, working culture, and gigantic constructions are being aesthetically acceptable, which creates the illusion of care for people. In reality, these enormous establishments have a propagandist function and have characteristics of ideology, because they highlight superiority, absolutism, oneness, and truthfulness – Faust: Childhood, manhood, age’s vigorous years, Surrounded by dangers, they’ll spend here. I wish to gaze again on such a land (“Und so verbringt, umrungen von Gefahr, / Hier Kindheit, Mann und Greis sein tüchtig Jahr. / Solch ein Gewimmel möcht ich sehn”) [V. 11577-11579] (Goethe 2001: 203).

Thus the population of the Faust colony, its so-called “people” are the disenfranchised proletariat of the new age, the future of modernity, or the millions of people locked up in concentration camps and “gulags” whose sole function is to be a driving force in the complete subjugation and control of nature. It is in this work that he gains “freedom” that is, liberation from dependence on nature when the population of the Faust colony completes the construction of coastal dams and the complete drying up of the swampy surface of the land seized from the sea.

Given the above, the “land” mentioned in Faust’s pre-death visions – “ground” (“Grund”) – obviously has no mythical or sacral meaning, but this concept refers to “land” as a “dead” matter, a geological fact. Accordingly, the semantics of the word “ground” refers to “soil” or “ground” and refers to the “land” that is only the object of technocratic, engineering, and economic development: thus, “ground”, i.e. cultivated, developed “land”, soil, arable land; “Grund”, i.e. a mineral deposit, a land abducted from the sea. That is why Faust does not say the word “Erde” the semantics of which considers the earth to be predominantly a mythical and sacral phenomenon, in the interior of which (“Erde”) the “soul” clothed with divine-cosmic elements, the socalled “spirit of the land” (“Erdgeist”) operates. Unlike the “romantic” and meta-physicist Faust of the first part of the tragedy, for the colonizer and technocrat Faust of the second part, this “land” or “Erde” has lost its value and is seen as a mere technical data.

Thus, because of the despotism and tyranny established in this coastal colony, Faust does not envision the contours of a free and legal state, and the concepts of “free land” and “free people” uttered in his promises cannot be linked to political freedom,
because he has already made the present political conditions for decades “totalitarian” and the political agenda of his colony is forever defined. This is a precondition for the future to be similarly “totalitarian”.

Therefore, “freedom” (“Freiheit”) promised by Faust to future mankind and his concept of “Free” (“frei”) means:
1. Liberation from dependence on nature through obedience to nature, full control of the forces of nature;
2. Freedom, free, as a technical-engineering characteristic and not as a political and axiological-ethical situation: in particular, freedom as a release of space for colonization-technocratic works (compare “I will open spaces for many millions”; the ground is solid, it borders and encircles the sea with a strong membrane”).
3. Freedom, free as a political, social, economic, and militaristic restraint based on force, brutality, and violence (Faust and Mephistopheles as its “icons” and “adepts”) – Mephistopheles: (Geist: the brutal spirit of the modern epoch – K.B.) The ocean’s freedom frees the mind/ there all thought is left behind! / You only need a handy grip [...] You have the might, and so the right (“Man hat Gewalt, so hat man Recht”) [V. 11177-11179; 11184] (Goethe 2001: 192).

ნიკოლოზ ბარათაშვილის პოემის „ბედი ქართლისა“ ლიტერატურული მოდელი ფენომენოლოგიური კრიტიკის შუქზე

გია არგანაშვილი — 2023-05-29

For two hundred years after writing “The Fate of Kartli” by Nikoloz Baratashvili, the discussion about this writing never stopped in our literary studies. It was never considered, that a reason for contradiction generated against the backdrop of the Treaty of Georgievsk (a source of inspiration) is closed, because in fact, the treaty had been cancelled after Act of Independence (1918) was adopted by the National Council of Georgia, whereby Independence of the Democratic Republic of Georgia was declared.

However, today we have to study the huge amount of scientific literature, which has been accumulated about this writing since the second half of the 19th century. The special literature devoted to the poet is quite rich and we can read three basic views, three different interpretations of “The Fate of Kartli” in it.

According to the first view, Nikoloz Baratashvili absolutely shares the king’s position regarding Russia and the poem itself represents a kind of apologia of Heraclius the second’s policy as well. Those, who do not agree with this position, consider the author to share Solomon Lionidze’s political belief. The third group see a kind of ambiguity in Nikoloz Baratashvili’s position. They think, that the author keeps this issue open and the reader is a witness of the opposition of the poet’s heart and mind.

Against the backdrop of all this, the researchers’ intensified interest towards the position of the text author seems to be exaggerated for us and I think, that the question: “Who is right in Nikoloz Baratashvili’s opinion: Heraclius or Solomon?”, breaks the boundaries of the text autonomy, especially when an answer to this question is looked up in the poet’s other writings or his biography.

Such attitude towards an artistic text did not change over time, every new research brought new knowledge and a general picture remained unchanged. A reader was only interested in an author’s opinion about a historical event, characters’ decision and characters themselves looked so “powerless” in the opinion of readers, that they could not protect themselves, take the responsibility and express an idea adequately.

Despite the fact, that the literary criticism noticed a modernized nature of the dispute between the king and his secretary many times, the reader still found it difficult to escape from the “fictional” reality and see the conventionality typical for an
artistic text.

Literature has gained so much experience, that a reader should not need this to be reminded. A historical character in an artistic text is an artistic character, a character created in fictitious reality, whose action is based on powerful motivation, is always more “real”, than any of his contemporaries, whom he can see, touch and share his thoughts.

However, a reader finds it difficult to avoid the realistic appeal of Nikoloz Baratashvili’s poem even today. He finds it difficult to analyze objectively, because he always sees his homeland in a small country, which was known as a country of Ivert in the poem and an aggressor in Russia, our co-believer, which still seizes a vast territory of his country. We can claim, that one of the characteristics of the poem (“The Fate of Kartli”), the king of Kartli-Kakheti has little in common with a historical king, Heraclius. The main idea of the poem really goes beyond the specific time and space and covers larger scale.

However, we do not neglect the traditional experience of reading a text, because it is a method of interpretation as well. Such experience is justified, when there is biographical artistic literature, which one of the types of historical artistic literature. It acquainted us with a historical individual and represents different episodes of his life in a genre of artistic narration again, but what will happen if we look at this situation without an outer characteristic, if we take specificity away from this situation and reduce everything to a general idea, if we doubt traditional conceptualization and want to transfer from so-called phenomenological attitude to natural one?

It is a general model of this doctrine, according to which, phenomenological attitude is received from natural attitude through refraining, from whence the only entity is to recognize consciousness and its initial experience.

In the 1920s, the Humanities (Roman Ingarden) successfully used Husserl’s phenomenological method to analyze an artistic text and showed us a way how to enter into the deep layers of an author’s consciousness through it.

“Phenomenological criticism tries to keep a literary work absolutely objective and impartial, hold back private interests, be buried into the conventional world of a text and describe every nook and corner of a writing with the highest accuracy and fairness. Phenomenological criticism does not mean evaluative analysis of a text, which represents its constructive and active interpretation and shows a critic’s subjective position, but it implies passive reception (perception) of a text and an objective description of its ideological essence. A specific literary text is considered to be a part of one organic wholeness. Wholeness is a concept relevant to an author’s consciousness; A part includes an author’s creative way and his writings arranged chronologically, which are thematically different, but they are always eager to reach the wholeness” (Ratiani 2008:56).

In our case, we must also consider, that Husserl placed real objects in “brackets” and phenomenological criticism puts historical context of a literary work, an author, the background to its creation and reading process.

It is no longer needed to fall back up on biographical criticism to cognize this consciousness. It is enough to cognize basic aspects on a text level, in which an author’s consciousness is realized. By considering all this, a well-known plot of the poem can be narrated in the following way:

“A small country, which was ruled by an old king, was invaded by the enemy. The battle was in process with transitional superiority and, despite two-day last-ditch assault, the king had to leave the capital and take shelter in one of the regions of the country. Here he met his prominent vizier and told him, that this failure caused the king to feel completely hopeless and as he could not see a reliable owner of the country in his heirs, he decided to give the chair of authority of his country to a ruler of self-religious great country and save his country from complete destruction.

The vizier got anxious by the king’s decision, because he was sure, that in exchange for peace, which his country would receive if it subordinated a foreign ruler, they had to compromise with freedom and independence”.

Let’s see what changes by such generalization of historical events in an artistic text?

Firstly, an angle of aspect changes and accordingly, a perception process (Phenomenology itself is exactly a rule of aspect and not science about a subject), the main idea of the poem, which was restricted to the Treaty over the years, was expanded and received a general meaning, a reader “got free” from a phenomenon existing beyond the artistic text. The dialogue between the king and his judge became more purposeful, the area of interpretation expanded and the symbolic-allegoric details became more meaningful under the conditions of the text autonomy. A biblical allusion took shape, the theme of heredity linked the lyrical poem to epos. Against the backdrop of this, genesis of a literary character having individual qualities became more relevant. In the text an allegoric meaning of two rivers (The Mtkvari and The Aragvi) became an object of extra research and a lyric character of the delayed rider (The Aragvi is running), which gives the plot of the poem a symbolic meaning.

A reader (literary studies as well) absolutely got free from those evidently irrelevant questions, which are primarily directed to the author and his attitude towards artistic characters, it mostly discusses the issue of author’s responsibility to their worldview.

The main idea of the poem was revealed, in which the discourse of the concepts of freedom and peace was opened, it got modern meanings and covered modern life as well. The characters took their own place in a gallery of the characters of “Literary Georgia”. “The old king”, as a literary character, stands next to the famous monarchs of the world literature after in one episode he is quite like to the subject of national epos (“The Knight in the Panther’s Skin by Shota Rustaveli). It creates an interesting perspective for the parallel investigation of these two poems and their comparative analysis.